Ryzen 5600X3D coming soon?

[dgianstefani]

Nope - the 5500 is a Cezanne APU with a disabled iGPU. The 5600 is proper Vermeer. I know, because I built a PC for my brother with a 5500 in it (he's one of the people I was talking about).


That's Core i5-13400 territory, so if it's competitive with that, then why not?


I seriously do recommend spending a bit more on a CPU because "budget" buyers don't upgrade CPUs as often as enthusiasts do. My brother swapped to that Ryzen 5 5500 from a first gen Core i7.

I also seriously do not recommend upgrading their monitor, because higher resolutions and refresh rates demand more graphical horsepower which they simply don't have / can't afford.

Better peripherals are also a waste of money when you're on a budget. If you only had £20 extra, would you spend it on a tier higher GPU or CPU, or on a little bit less shitty keyboard that... uh... has keys?

I mean no offense, but you clearly have no idea how a budget gamer thinks.

They're all Zen 3, which is the architecture. Cezanne and Vermeer are just internal codenames to differentiate USPs like an iGPU, which the 5500 doesn't even have.

5600X3D will not be competitive with the 13400, only in gaming performance, and only if both of those CPUs are paired with an actual high end GPU and a high refresh rate monitor. Pair both with a budget GPU, like a budget gamer would, and you'll get the same FPS, except the 13400 will be much faster at everything else due to core count and ADL being a great architecture with very strong core performance.

You said it yourself, higher resolutions and refresh rates require better GPUs.

Buying a CPU that only makes sense when paired with high refresh rate monitors, which need powerful GPUs, but instead pairing it with a budget GPU, doesn't make sense. You're better off buying the cheaper CPU that has higher clockspeed or core count (since it will do well generally), which in this case would be the 5600/5700.

If a budget gamer isn't prioritising GPU they don't know what they're doing. You aren't giving them good advice by telling them to focus on an expensive CPU like the 5600X3D, at the cost of compromises everywhere else in the build.

Every modern CPU including the 13100f, is enough to max out the FPS of any GPU a budget gamer is going to be able to afford. So yes, I think I do know how a budget gamer thinks.

Future proofing, as you seem to be advocating for with your first gen i7 story, isn't in the cards for a "budget gamer".

 

[AusWolf]

They're all Zen 3, which is the architecture.

That doesn't mean they're the same. You're arguing about semantics here.

AMD Ryzen 5 5500 Review: Yea or Nay?

The Ryzen 5 5500 certainly works well, but realistically if you're on a budget yet remain a performance-minded enthusiast, this CPU should be avoided even at $140.

www.techspot.com

5600X3D will not be competitive with the 13400

How do you know?

Buying a CPU that only makes sense when paired with high refresh rate monitors, which need powerful GPUs, but instead pairing it with a budget GPU, doesn't make sense. You're better off buying the cheaper CPU that has higher clockspeed or core count (since it will do well generally), which in this case would be the 5600X/5700.

Except that you're only pairing it with a budget GPU right now. When you next upgrade your GPU, your new budget GPU will perform at the same level as a high-end one does now. Budget gamers don't buy CPUs for their present use, but for longevity.

If a budget gamer isn't prioritising GPU they don't know what they're doing. You aren't giving them good advice by telling them to focus on an expensive CPU like the 5600X3D, at the cost of compromises everywhere else in the build.

I didn't say prioritise your CPU over your GPU. I said prioritise longevity when choosing a CPU, and prioritise present-day use when choosing a GPU, and forget about fancy peripherals because they're a waste of money.

Future proofing, as you seem to be advocating for with your first gen i7 story, isn't in the cards for a "budget gamer".

It is exactly the budget gamer in who's hands future proofing is! Whether you just buy a new GPU 5 years from now, or you also have to swap your CPU as well, does matter.

 

[dgianstefani]

That doesn't mean they're the same. You're arguing about semantics here.

AMD Ryzen 5 5500 Review: Yea or Nay?

The Ryzen 5 5500 certainly works well, but realistically if you're on a budget yet remain a performance-minded enthusiast, this CPU should be avoided even at $140.

www.techspot.com

How do you know?


Except that you're only pairing it with a budget GPU right now. When you next upgrade your GPU, your new budget GPU will perform at the same level as a high-end one does now. Budget gamers don't buy CPUs for their present use, but for longevity.


I didn't say prioritise your CPU over your GPU. I said prioritise longevity when choosing a CPU, and prioritise present-day use when choosing a GPU, and forget about fancy peripherals because they're a waste of money.


It is exactly the budget gamer in who's hands future proofing is! Whether you just buy a new GPU 5 years from now, or you also have to swap your CPU as well, does matter.

Even in your own example the CPU is upgraded lmao.

Your brother moved from a first gen i5 to an i7 for "a couple of quid" years after the fact.



Knowing the performance of a 5600X3D is pretty easy, you just take a 5800X3D, remove two cores and lower the frequency.

 

[AusWolf]

Even in your own example the CPU is upgraded lmao.

Your brother moved from a first gen i5 to an i7.

Yeah, because I bought one for him. Surely, you can't go more budget than that. Laughing smiley highly warranted, I guess. People not having money for a 10 year-old processor is really funny.

Knowing the performance of a 5600X3D is pretty easy, you just take a 5800X3D, remove two cores and lower the frequency.

How do you "remove cores" from an FPS chart?

 

[Dragokar]

Is it possible to merge the two threads?

AMD Readies Ryzen 5 5600X3D to Take on Intel's 13th Gen Core i5 + DDR4 Options

AMD is finally coming around to the idea of a 6-core processor with 3D Vertical Cache technology, only this time it's for the older Socket AM4 platform. The new Ryzen 5 5600X3D could be positioned competitively against the lower end of Intel's 13th Gen Core i5 processor series, so it could...

www.techpowerup.com

Or if not, is it a viable option to use an existing thread in the future to avoid multiple discussions about the same news?

I do think the 5600X3D would be smart, and I know some guys who would buy it IF priced right.

 

[dgianstefani]

Yeah, because I bought one for him. Surely, you can't go more budget than that.


How do you "remove cores" from an FPS chart?

Would him buying an i7 on launch make more sense? So he could spend 40% more and save the hassle of a 5min cpu swap for peanuts a few years later? So his new budget GPU isn't bottlenecked? Assuming of course a higher tier CPU from the same "5 year old" generation would make a meaningful difference, to use your example.

That's the argument you're making for paying twice the price for a cpu with the same amount of cores 5500-5600X3D, for the sake of "future proofing".

If you look at ~five year old CPUs today, the 7700K for example, if you paired it with an RTX 4090 it wouldn't do too great, the main reason being core count. In five years time hopefully the RTX 7060 would be at about that performance level.

 

[AusWolf]

Would him buying an i7 on launch make more sense? So he could spend 40% more and save the hassle of a 5min cpu swap for peanuts a few years later? So his new budget GPU isn't bottlenecked?

That's the argument you're making for paying twice the price for a cpu with the same amount of cores 5500-5600X3D, for the sake of "future proofing".

You're putting words into my mouth now. I never said that the 5500 and 5600X3D were the same kind of budget offerings for the same kind of buyers.

With your logic, X3D is a waste of money on all levels, because it's "the same amount of cores".

My argument is that it's better to future-proof your CPU as much as you can than to waste your hard-earned cash on pointless peripherals and higher resolution displays that you can't afford to feed with GPU power.

 

[dgianstefani]

You're putting words into my mouth now. I never said that the 5500 and 5600X3D were the same kind of budget offerings for the same kind of buyers.

With your logic, X3D is a waste of money on all levels, because it's "the same amount of cores".

My argument is that it's better to future-proof your CPU as much as you can than to waste your hard-earned cash on pointless peripherals and higher resolution displays that you can't afford to feed with GPU power.

No. Try reading what I'm saying. X3D is a great option if you're pairing it with a strong GPU.

I'm using the exact logic and quotes you've written.

Buying CPUs that are designed for high end rigs (that have good GPUs and monitors) and pairing it with low resolution/refresh rate monitors and cheap GPUs is much more of a waste of money than investing in a better GPU or monitor instead.

 

[AusWolf]

No. Try reading what I'm saying. X3D is a great option if you're pairing it with a strong GPU.

I'm using the exact logic and quotes you've written.

Buying CPUs that are designed for high end rigs (that have good GPUs and monitors) and pairing it with low resolution/refresh rate monitors and cheap GPUs is much more of a waste of money than investing in a better GPU or monitor instead.

You are pairing it with a strong GPU, just not now, but possibly a couple years later when budget GPUs are a lot stronger than they are now. That's why I said that pricing is critical. If the 5600X3D is priced right, it might be a good option over the 5600X or i5-13400.

Edit: I'm not suggesting buying an inadequate GPU in favour of future-proofing your CPU. What I'm suggesting is spending any extra budget you've got left on your CPU instead of clicky plastics, for example.

Edit 2: Also, saving 20 quid on your CPU right now only to buy the higher-end one later is the exact opposite of saving.

 

[dgianstefani]

You are pairing it with a strong GPU, just not now, but possibly a couple years later when budget GPUs are a lot stronger than they are now. That's why I said that pricing is critical. If the 5600X3D is priced right, it might be a good option over the 5600X or i5-13400.

Edit: I'm not suggesting buying an inadequate GPU in favour of future-proofing your CPU. What I'm suggesting is spending any extra budget you've got left on your CPU instead of clicky plastics, for example.

Edit 2: Also, saving 20 quid on your CPU right now only to buy the higher-end one later is the exact opposite of saving.

Is it 20 quid though? 5600X3D will be, at minimum, $200, more likely around $240.

And is it a couple years later? Or five years later, you're mixing up your quotes. Is it really "budget" minded to replace your entry level GPU every two years?

Extra budget should go to GPU because you'll always notice a GPU improvement, RDNA2 GPUs are particularly cheap right now, 6800 is within reach for budget gamers. CPU improvement is only noticeable when you're CPU limited, which is almost never in budget builds. CPU improvement investment at the budget tier build (for premium tier builds it makes sense since you're angling for the best experience and have the GPU to match), so you'll see some potential benefit five years from now isn't smart, since you're seeing no benefit for those five years but have lost the benefit of a higher tier GPU. If you do end up needing more CPU at that point due to upgrading from a 2023 budget GPU to a 2028 budget GPU, then it's cheap to buy a compatible CPU/platform upgrade then and you'll be able to get a much higher tier than if you tried to squeeze it into the initial budget, plus inflation will make money worth less then anyway, so a five year old second hand CPU going for $100 compared to $500 when it was new, is more like $75 in five year old money.

There's some argument to be made for going with a larger SSD as an option rather than putting every spare $ in the budget to a better GPU, since sometimes ~$20-30 won't be enough for a tier of GPU, but is the difference between, say, a 500 GB M.2 and a 1 TB M.2.

 

[AusWolf]

Is it 20 quid though? 5600X3D will be, at minimum, $200, more likely around $240.

It might be a hard sell then, as it's 5700X territory. Like I said, pricing will be critical.

And is it a couple years later? Or five years later, you're mixing up your quotes. Is it really "budget" minded to replace your entry level GPU every two years?

Yeah, couple means two, five means five. You're arguing over semantics again. The GPU is the most likely thing you replace in your system first due to graphical technological advancements. An old high-end CPU still works like a CPU, but your old GPU might not have DX12, or DLSS, for example. Besides, is replacing your CPU more budget-friendly than your GPU?

Extra budget should go to GPU because you'll always notice a GPU improvement

I never doubted that. All I said was, if you have any spare cash left, it's better to spend it on a better CPU than on peripherals. (Are we going in circles?)

6800 is within reach for budget gamers

Now I'm sure you have no idea what budget gaming is. Some people build whole systems less pricey than the 6800 alone.

CPU improvement is only noticeable when you're CPU limited, which is almost never in budget builds.

It is very noticeable years down the line with a new GPU.

If you do end up needing more CPU at that point due to upgrading from a 2023 budget GPU to a 2028 budget GPU, then it's cheap to buy a compatible CPU/platform upgrade then and you'll be able to get a much higher tier than if you tried to squeeze it into the initial budget

I thought that too until I checked for example, 7700K and compatible motherboard prices. Holy moly, take a look, seriously!

a five year old second hand CPU going for $100 compared to $500 when it was new, is more like $75 in five year old money.

Sure, but we're talking about a 6-core here. I'm not arguing for buying a 5950X on a "budget".

There's some argument to be made for going with a larger SSD as an option rather than putting every spare $ in the budget to a better GPU, since sometimes ~$20-30 won't be enough for a tier of GPU, but is the difference between, say, a 500 GB M.2 and a 1 TB M.2.

More storage can always be bought later when needed, but you don't change your main components like your underwear.

 

[Mussels]

Y U boost so low?

Why Why Why?!

5800x3D at 4.45GHz says "these aren't the droids you're looking for" "Hello there"

clock speed doesnt seem to harm the 3D chips much, considering how bad the 5800x3D smashes the 5800x which can boost 600MHz higher (4.45 vs 5.05)

 

[dgianstefani]

5800x3D at 4.45GHz says "these aren't the droids you're looking for" "Hello there"

View attachment 300793
clock speed doesnt seem to harm the 3D chips much, considering how bad the 5800x3D smashes the 5800x which can boost 600MHz higher (4.45 vs 5.05)

Yeah it only matters for productivity apps, gaming prefers cache, mostly. CS GO etc some esports games prefer frequency.

 

[Frick]

Very little reason to get it at all. The concept of a "premium" six core is flawed, especially when the clocks are limited even harder than the 5800X3D already are.

It will launch cheaper than the 5800X3D, but not by enough to make the compromise sane.

Any true "budget" gamer shouldn't be looking at X3D chips at all, but rather putting their money into a faster GPU or better monitor (many of them still on 60 Hz 1080p and RX580/equivalent). If you're not a budget gamer then "upgrading" to a six core is just silly.

I'd be into it specifically bacause of the X3D part. Juicy upgrade from the 2600x, while keeping it not too expensive.

 

[kapone32]

In the eyes of some people these have gone from failed 8 chips X3D, to 6 cores is not enough and now the price is too high. Once again in the eyes of some users AMD is not good for anything. The fact remains that AMD have sold (In their own words) over 17 million AM4 CPUs. That means they have every right to release a 6 core X3D chip and as far as it being a huge premium over the 5600X we don't know that either. I am so glad that AMD keeps it's products close to the vest so that some of the people who love to bash them can look so juvenile in their argument. I specifically remember how some people made the argument that the 5800X3D was not going to be a good chip. Now I see the old arguments from Sandybridge that the CPU does not improve performance but this is AMD. A Company that for the entire Ryzen lineup gave users at least a 10% performance increase per release. Now the great 5000 chips (supposedly) get another addition and it's bad or not worth it?

 

[freeagent]

I went from 3rd Gen Intel to pretty much a 5600X.. I have no qualms with AMD

I have no intention on moving to AM5 though

Zen 3 was a game changer for sure.

 

[N/A]

It's not worth it whatever you are saving by not getting a fully enabled 5800 X3D. Once the CPU starts making sense it keeps making sense eg. delivering a certain framarate. In 2023 the 6 core is such a step backwards of insane proportions and makes all the difference between a complete useless e-waste dump and a good processor.

 

[wheresmycar]

I'd be into it specifically bacause of the X3D part. Juicy upgrade from the 2600x, while keeping it not too expensive.

Since 5000-series i've come a long way to admire 1st and 2nd Gen AM4 adopters.... the expansive variety of 5000/X3D processors is truly a treat and its still getting better, not just the 6c-X3D but the crazy price reductions and on-going reductions for those who haven't upgraded yet. Here in the UK a 5800X3D is going for £270 hence the 5600X3D might see itself somewhere in the £200 region (sharing a ££-bed with the 5800X).

I hope AMD reproduces the same magic with AM5 both with 6c-X3Ds + platform Fwd Gen longevity beyond the 2025 span, i guess "+" being indicative of ~2026

All the while, i'm still on a 9700K for my main game driver. In practice, it does meet my performance targets which aren't overly enthusiastic and although single threaded it does keep up with game smoothness in the titles i'm currently playing. Although I cannot deny i'm liking X3D "soft-like-butter-silkiness" (+efficiency) hence its lit up like a sore thumb on my upgrade radar.

 

[R0H1T]

It's not worth it whatever you are saving by not getting a fully enabled 5800 X3D. Once the CPU starts making sense it keeps making sense eg. delivering a certain framarate. In 2023 the 6 core is such a step backwards of insane proportions and makes all the difference between a complete useless e-waste dump and a good processor.

I'm sure you'd probably contribute towards a gofund me campaign by a troubled soul wanting 5800x3d levels of performance but not having enough money to go past the 5600x3d

I mean people do have a budget for a reason don't you think? Or is everyone printing money at their home kinda like the US fed?

And if you're on a (tight)budget always wait for good deals

 

[Lew Zealand]

It is only the exception that strengthens the rule. And that 5500 doesn't break the bank. It is enough to find an owner of LGA 1151 and i5 from that period. Can't find it?
In 2017 I had 7700K. It could be recycled, now, as an excellent HTCP without a dedicated video card and even with a new middle video card it is not ashamed. With 1660 Super, it's all you need.
What are we talking about? We find owners of Intel 4/5/6 series who still use their computers.
So, even as recycling, the myth is not valid. The myth was true if a significant mass of people used the old B350s with the most powerful 5000 series processors.

You have an assumption with no data. Provide the data to back it up. It may be that there are many people with B350s and an 5700, not even a 5800X3D or a 5900X. Even a 3600 is a great upgrade from someone who started with an R3 1200 or an R5 1600. And many have. The choice is there and people can simply choose their price and performance point. And when it comes time for my other kid to CPU upgrade, my 5600 goes there and I'll get a 5800x3D. Such nice flexibility from Mobos that were bought years apart and can take a wide range of CPUs.

To be specific, the R5 5500 is the best example of this as for only $89 you can have a very good gaming CPU that can be slotted into almost any AM4 Mobo and provide a nice gaming performance uplift to a huge range of previous-gen CPUs. Most especially the older ones in and significantly above it's price range.

But in your example someone who started with a 7700K can upgrade to nothing. Nothing at all. Not even a simple 8700 non-K which would be a real nice performance uplift. Sure you can still use it, I game with an i7-4790 pretty often with properly matched games and the 7700K is notably better, but it'll run out of resources to maintain 60 FPS in some games.

When it came time to upgrade my i5-8400, which I chose instead of an R5 2600 for performance reasons at the time, the only reasonable upgrade was an i7-9700F which I was patient and got a decent price on. Not a great price and it's still my most expensive CPU. If I'd chosen the R5 2600, I could have gotten a R7 3700X for the same price which does media encoding 25% faster (what I was using the CPU power for). 1440p Gaming is identical for the 2 CPUs. And I'd still have a decent option for better future gaming in the 5800X3D (as the media encoding project is done).

 

[R0H1T]

The funny thing is Intel didn't need to force 5(6?) motherboards from 6xxx to 11xxx chips. Probably one or two at most.

 

[wheresmycar]

It's not worth it whatever you are saving by not getting a fully enabled 5800 X3D. Once the CPU starts making sense it keeps making sense eg. delivering a certain framarate. In 2023 the 6 core is such a step backwards of insane proportions and makes all the difference between a complete useless e-waste dump and a good processor.

isn't it too early to form earth shattering strong opinions in the negative? Let the benchmarks speak for themselves. The way i see it, if it comfortably beats the 5600/5600X the rest is down to the price.

You have to keep in mind, a vast number of budget buyers won't even come close to picking up a 5800X3D and may even skip the 6c-X3D part for a budget constrained £120 5600 non-X. Thats the nature of the game, all performance tiers are applicable none takes absolute precedence. Dropping a 6c-X3D expands options and may even influence further price reductions for non-X3D parts hence a value-driven budget tailored broader spectrum for everyone.

Also we can't ignore X3D showing some serious performance improvements in select CPU bound~memory starved titles - in a couple of titles i've seen as much 20-30% uplift. Worst case scenario, trim the 6c-X3Ds prowess by half and you've still got 15% worthy-of-a-shout reassurance. Its not all about FPS advances either, with larger cache you can expect less noticeable snags delays/latency, micro-stutter reduction, more efficient AI/physics processing, etc (facilitating smoother gameplay). So why not bring some of these perks a little closer to the wider budget gaming crowd? (obviously subject to benchmarking analysis)

You have an assumption with no data. Provide the data to back it up. It may be that there are many people with B350s and an 5700, not even a 5800X3D or a 5900X. Even a 3600 is a great upgrade from someone who started with an R3 1200 or an R5 1600. And many have. The choice is there and people can simply choose their price and performance point. And when it comes time for my other kid to CPU upgrade, my 5600 goes there and I'll get a 5800x3D. Such nice flexibility from Mobos that were bought years apart and can take a wide range of CPUs.

To be specific, the R5 5500 is the best example of this as for only $89 you can have a very good gaming CPU that can be slotted into almost any AM4 Mobo and provide a nice gaming performance uplift to a huge range of previous-gen CPUs. Most especially the older ones in and significantly above it's price range.

But in your example someone who started with a 7700K can upgrade to nothing. Nothing at all. Not even a simple 8700 non-K which would be a real nice performance uplift. Sure you can still use it, I game with an i7-4790 pretty often with properly matched games and the 7700K is notably better, but it'll run out of resources to maintain 60 FPS in some games.

When it came time to upgrade my i5-8400, which I chose instead of an R5 2600 for performance reasons at the time, the only reasonable upgrade was an i7-9700F which I was patient and got a decent price on. Not a great price and it's still my most expensive CPU. If I'd chosen the R5 2600, I could have gotten a R7 3700X for the same price which does media encoding 25% faster (what I was using the CPU power for). 1440p Gaming is identical for the 2 CPUs. And I'd still have a decent option for better future gaming in the 5800X3D (as the media encoding project is done).

Gica only sings one song and demands an audience. Its an ear-bleeding terrible song.

I still recall Gica's constant rant by repetitively suggesting "its the market which determines the price, not NVIDIA" lol. All in the name of endorsing nVs 40-series all-time-high prices when others disapproved. IMO, the bias is deliberate, troll-galore and a means to mock others for their leanings/openness to adopt a variety of products/parts. So, don't bother yourself too much with Gicas rubbish unless its a means of entertainment (i indulge myself occasionally ).

 

[Gica]

You have an assumption with no data.

Can you contradict me? With dates. Of course, there are such combinations and I'm sure there are others, with Celeron from 2012 or Pentium from 2015.

It may be that there are many people with B350s and an 5700, not even a 5800X3D or a 5900X. Even a 3600 is a great upgrade from someone who started with an R3 1200 or an R5 1600. But in your example someone who started with a 7700K can upgrade to nothing

A colossal leap would be the transition from 10100 (under $100 in 2020) to an 11400F in 2023 (about the same price as 5500). And the 5500 does not seem to surpass a 7700K if it cannot surpass a 12100 in gaming. 11400F is definitely better performing.
The idea is different: from 2017 to 2023 I used a 7700K speed processor and the other one used a 1200 with Pentium speed during the same period and only in 2023 it equals 7700K. What business did I do with the motherboard?
They tell me about recycling as if an Intel cannot be recycled. It can even be very good because all old processors have an included igp with excellent hardware enc/dec support.

Coming back to the topic, the release of 7600 X3D was news. Not 5600 X3D.
5800X has such a low price that I don't see the point of this X3D. It's probably just a rumor.

I still recall Gica's constant rant by repetitively suggesting "its the market which determines the price, not NVIDIA" lol.

And I support it even now. They will sell for $10,000 if they have customers and $500 if they don't. Am I to understand that your country is occupied by North Korea and the rules of the market economy have been banned?

 

[vacsati]

this is own goal, if AMD releases a 5600X3D.
It doesn't make sense and will hurt 7600 etc sales.

And the photo is just info written on a spreadsheet. Anyone could do that, share and claim that's a leak.
I don't think there will be a 5600X3D.

The 7000s serie alreadfy quite failed, so doesnt really matter.

 

[gffermari]

The 7000s serie alreadfy quite failed, so doesnt really matter.

I wouldn't say that they failed.
Both 7000 and 13000 series don't sell that much because most people had already upgraded to a 5000 or 11/12000 CPU waiting for the gpus to become affordable. It's not that they are not good.